View Article
13
The day after the election House Republican Leader John Boehner faced a tough question: Would he compromise with Obama or not? It was a Hobson’s Choice. Either way he was walking into a political minefield.
 
In the end Speaker Boehner threw what looked like a compromise on the table – in effect, saying to Obama, Okay, here it is: We’ll go along with raising revenues (meaning taxes) but you have to go along with tax reform and spending cuts – then the Speaker explained what he had in mind was like the 1986 tax reform compromise between Reagan and Tip O’Neal (that raised taxes).
 
In a way that did sound like a wind change – as if Boehner was saying to Obama, We Republicans can’t go along with outright repeal of the Bush tax cuts – which is what you want – but if we can dress tax increases up a bit and call it loophole closing then there’s an agreement to be had providing you offer us a big spending cut in return.
 
Of course, we can’t be sure that’s what Speaker Boehner had in mind at all. After all, this is politics and things are not always what they seem – it could be the cloud floating down Pennsylvania Avenue from the Capital to the White House isn’t a compromise at all – it’s a political two-step, with John Boehner trying to put Obama in a corner so Obama’s the one to say, No deal.
 
 
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (6) RSS comment feed |

Comments

clarence swinney
# clarence swinney
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 7:53 AM
How did we get from nearly $6 trillion projected surpluses in 2001 to $6 trillion in new debt?
As President Obama and Republican leaders in Congress square off on the debt-cutting measures that could send us over the fiscal cliff, “it’s crucial to remember the source of our deficit and debt. The Center for American Progress’ Michael Linden explains the laws passed during the Bush administration along with the wars and the bad economy over a decade made up 86 percent of the debt we’ve accumulated since 2001. President Obama’s budgets and the stimulus are responsible for only 14 percent.
Keep that in mind as Republicans demand concessions from the president and the middle class.
Tags: Bush Tax Cuts, debt, Deficit, fiscal cliff, surplus
clarence swinney
# clarence swinney
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 4:30 PM
WHY THE DEBT?
In 2000, We had revenue of 20% and spending 18% of GDP. Surplus.
In 2009, we had 15% of Revenue and 25% of spending as % of GDP.
That was an increase in Spending and decline in Revenue.
Bush policies. How will historians rate his administration?

dap916
# dap916
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 4:48 PM
I'm not sure who actually said there would ever be $6 trillion in surpluses...sounds like spin and rhetoric and innuendo. The truth is that Bush took our national debt up FAR more than anyone ever thought he would and because of that most republicans...no, not all....aren't big Bush advocates. But, are you then just fine and dandy with the exponential rise in our national debt under Obama? Are you just one more person that says: "it's all Bush's fault"?

Obama has inhereted his own mess now. No more "Bush did it". Let's see how he cleans up his own mess. Thanks.
clarence swinney
# clarence swinney
Thursday, November 15, 2012 6:38 AM
RUNAWAY SPENDING
Dan Mitchell of Cato on CNCB ranted Obama runaway spending is like a run away train.
Dan is totally wrong. Spending is under best control in decades.
Major steps have been taken to control spending.
Obama Efficient Government Spending Programs and the Budget Control Act
produces $1500 Billion in savings in discretionary spending 2013 through 2022.
The reductions will shrink non-defense discretionary spending to the lowest level on record as a share of GDP, since 1962.
The Obama record will be to increase total spending by 2% to 8% from Bush last budget to his last budget in first term. He budgeted to spend 3800 in fiscal 2013 and if so that will be only 280B over Bush last budget. clarence swinney --part info from policy shop.net
dap916
# dap916
Thursday, November 15, 2012 7:24 AM
Um, swinney.....can you tell us when Obama/democrats had a "budget" please. You might want to lose the "President Obama's budgets" bullski.

If you want to put stuff like that here, you're going to learn that skewed information really isn't accepted.

By the way, do a Google search and see what is the number one expense of the fed....and how much that has increased over the past 4 years under Obama. Thanks.
Carbine
# Carbine
Thursday, November 15, 2012 7:04 PM
Uh, dap916, recall the biblical admonition against casting your pearls...

Post Comment

Only registered users may post comments.
Copyright (c) Talking About Politics   :  DNN Hosting  :  Terms Of Use  :  Privacy Statement